NAGARJUNA CONSTRUCTION CO LTD Vs. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
Pratibha Upasani, -
(1.) BOTH these appeals can be disposed of by this common order as they are arising out of the common order dated March 17, 2004, passed by the learned presiding officer of the DRT, Bangalore, in I. A. No. 1 and I. A. No. 568 of 2003 in O. A. No. 604 of 2001. The parties are also the same and the issues are inter-connected.
(2.) I. A. No. 1 of 2003 is taken out by the applicant-bank praying for adding the present appellant M/s. Nagarjuna Construction Company Ltd., as defendant No. 4 in the main original application while the other I. A. No. 568 of 2003 is taken out by the applicant-bank for carrying out certain amendment in terms of the Schedule in the original application itself which proposes to incorporate the amendments concerning the proposed defendant No. 4/Nagarjuna Construction Ltd. By the impugned order, the learned presiding officer allowed both these applications and in pursuance to that order the amendment, in fact, has been carried out also. But the appellants are aggrieved by the impugned order whereby they were joined as party defendant No. 4 and amendment with respect to incorporating certain formalities was permitted to be carried out. Hence, these appeals.
I have heard Mr. R. Chandrasekaran, advocate for the appellant and Mr. v. Girish Kumar, advocate for respondent No. 1-bank.
(3.) I have also gone through the proceedings and having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by both parties at the Bar, in my view, the learned presiding officer has not committed any error.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.